View allAll Photos Tagged replicator
Build by Titans Creations for Legoland Malaysia May the 4th event.
Minifig scaled and measuring 110 cm by 85 cm , its bigger than the UCS Millennium Falcon.
Main objective of this build is to replicate the interior of the popular Millennium Falcon as accurate as possible with references to different online materials.
Features 24 LED , 7 which are programmed to pulsate at the rear thrusters for realism , and the rest spread among the corridor, hyperdrive and cockpit.
Took a total of 2 months to plan and build.
Thank you for viewing !
Do check us out on www.titanscreations.com
Self portrait.
-
This image is copyrighted to Zhang Jingna; Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws as well as contract laws (for which 3rd parties which are involved may take joint action with me against you). Please write to me at zemotion@zemotion.net for express permission to use any of my works.
Out with Ectro testing out Dennis Calvert's circle machine style. Usually i can't do this, since i'm alone, but i convinced Ectro that we should try it out. The tunnel was so foggy from the temperature difference between the inside and outside that we had to use a air blower to keep the lens un-fogged each minute and a half or so. This was about the longest photo we could take at about a minute.
I had been planning to shoot this morning's sunrise at the Owens River right outside Bishop, but I ended up waking up at 3:30 AM and was unable to get back to sleep. So, while lying there, I decided to venture up to this spot. I'm really glad I did! I found some wonderful patterns on the frozen lake and even had some very high clouds to pick up a bit of sunrise light.
There is a question on replication of two of my doll bodies.
mCC. On this body a situation such. I touched all conceived characters on this body and found out that I at me am not molded on mCC only one by Lee Pace. At me even basic on this body is not present any more.
So it turns out that personally I need only one last circulation.
And that the question whether I need - seems, I cooled down to the character. However, he is a handsome man, and I just like that do not refuse handsome men. So my position on this body such: if I nevertheless want Lee, then all the same following circulation will be the last. And if I do not want, then the last was last.
What opinion on this occasion at you? How do many people need mCC? In the winter I thought that there are persons interested to get for minimee, but the situation on minimee changed so...
I offer in comments to write it is necessary/not necessary and when if it is necessary?
The other day I estimated the sequence of circulations and novelties, defined the place for the possible circulation of mCC approximately through 8 circulations.
And maybe, you will have ideas and offers?
wC. Here all is a little differently. I with confidence closed replication of this body for the same reason that now with mCC - exhausted characters on it, I have no more need and there is no demand for it.
Nevertheless, infrequently but there are interesting people. Generally, same question: it is necessary /not necessary and if it is necessary, then when?
I can tell that by my calculations to pay the minimum circulation to the caster, and it did not cost a pretty penny to customers, about 5 pieces of castings are necessary. The cost of accessories will pay off too. But on payment of my work here the reserve will not be any more therefore it would be desirable 1-2 castings more that it was not so annoying to spend time for preparation of master-model, processing/assembly/shipment of castings.
Generally, I wait for your opinions.
I have no idea how this light pattern got into my camera, other than I know I was in the car at night. It may me think--is a "true" abstract something that you could hope to produce on purpose, or reproduce? Is an abstract a unique moment in time and space captured in part by chance? It seems almost all of my "abstracts" started off as intentional shots and were degraded/upgraded to the "abstract" status after examination...
This is a replicate of the Golden Gate Bridge located in Disney's California Adventure park.
♫♬♩♪ - I like this tune at the moment.
NOTE:
- I used a free LightRoom 2.x preset called "SarahJMinTeaNE"
© All rights reserved. This image is copyrighted to Tim Wood; Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws. Please contact me at woodrot147@aol.com for express permission to use any of my photographs.
All of my images can be purchased...... Visit my website, coastal and countryside images at......
Facebook...
www.facebook.com/TimWoodPhotoGallery
Twitter......
My most popular photos on Flickr...
www.flickriver.com/photos/imagesofwales/popular-interesting/
Someone mentioned on one of my Stargate Pics that they would love to see me make Replicators. This was the best i could do :P
Nature's miracle 81/116
For six word story.
Life's ability to reproduce itself and carry on its line is truly a miracle! In this image you can see the bud is putting out new leaves like those around it! So precious! So beautiful! So remarkable!
I'm reminded of a Lakota prayer ~
Let us give thanks for this beautiful day.
Let us give thanks for this life.
Let us give thanks for water
Without which life would not be possible.
Taken near The Regency, Laguna Woods, California. © 2015 All Rights Reserved.
My images are not to be used, copied, edited, or blogged without my explicit permission.
Please!! NO Glittery Awards or Large Graphics...Buddy Icons are OK. Thank You!
Many thanks for every kind comment, fave, your words of encouragement, and the inspiration of your fine photography,
my friends! You make my day every day!
Tried to replicate my first ever Explored image, but I couldn't quite manage the Christmas tree bokeh!
(Given that I'm recovering from a heart attack, you should see the candy cane heart as an ironic statement of sorts. Happy Christmas to all my Flickr Friends. This is one Christmas I didn't think I'd make!)
UPDATE: This photo made Explore December 25th, 2009. Highest position: 110. Thanks so much!
replicated from: photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5983/2048/1600/blog - kittenwar - my entry.jpg
, as leeching it seems to cut in and out
16° parossismo del Cratere di Sud est dell'Etna visto dalla Schiena dell'Asino, 8 Ottobre 2011-
South East crater's Etna 16th paroxysm seen from the Back of the Donkey, October 8th 2011.
---
Getty Images | Fluidr | Flickr Hive Mind | DNA | Website
---
Please add COMMENTS and FAVES. I hope to replicate as soon as possible!!! :)
Replicating a skull desk lamp found in MS Merchandising.
[low quality phone camera image]
Castle Towers, Sydney
My modification of Thoki Yenn’s DNA model. Folded from a long strip (1:8 or so) of metallic paper. Instructions for Thoki Yenn’s original DNA can be found in his Orikata book.
DNA replication is an important biological process in which the DNA double helix is unwound and each strand is used as a template to copy the other half.
This model can also be viewed as a an abstract structure, maybe a kind of figure with the two loose ends of the unwound helix resembling wings.
“The Eye Moment photos by Nolan H. Rhodes”
“Theeyeofthemoment21@gmail.com”
“www.flickr.com/photos/the_eye_of_the_moment”
“Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws.”
I could not replicate the shot exactly due to the re-landscaping and trees planted along the old railway line, now cycle path. Sad to see the miners Institute in such a bad condition.
The DMUs shot is definitely taken off the platform footbridge of ABERTRIDWR station to get the height. The colliery in the background is WINDSOR.
ABER Branch opened 1st February 1894
Abertridwr was the only intermediate passing place on single line branch 3 miles and 34 chains in length.
Station was originally named ABER but station master suggested it be renamed ABERTRIDWR after expanding local village in June 1899
UNIVERSAL colliery further up the valley was the Synghenydd disaster colliery 1913 when 439 men died. It closed in 1928 but was used for ventilation for WINDSOR until 1979 when shafts were filled.
Hence UNIVERSAL appears to be derelict in many 1950s photos but shafts were still open.
Windsor colliery was linked underground to Nantgarw in 1976 but closed on 6th November 1986. Coal was extracted at Nantgarw from 1976 so no coal trains required up branch after 1976. .
Last DMU passenger train on branch 13 June 1964
RCTS excursion to WINDSOR 18th March 1972
Last coal train 4th Dec 1976 to WINDSOR colliery.
Last train was 15 April 1977 when industrial loco 27655 was recovered from colliery to Radyr yard by a class 47.
objective- replicate a master photographer
subject- sandy
approach- Brought back most of the lights. wanted to make this look like a portrait. had the model look serious. Her head tilted and downwards.
Mutations = genetic, copying mistakes.
The progressive, evolution story
is one huge MISTAKE
which, ironically,
depends on MISTAKES
as its mechanism ...
Mistake
- upon mistake
- upon mistake
- upon mistake
So that the entire, human genome
is created from billions of mistakes.
If, after reading this, you still believe in the progressive evolution story - you will believe anything.
EVOLUTION .....
What is the truth about Darwinian, progressive (microbes to human) evolution?
Although we are told it is an irrefutable, scientific fact .....
the real fact is, as we will show later, there is no credible mechanism for such progressive evolution.
So what was the evolutionary idea that Darwin popularised?
Put simply ...
Darwin believed that there was unlimited variability in the gene pool of all living things, which would enable the transformation of the first, self-replicating, living cell, through many years of natural selection, into every living thing, including humans.
However, the changes possible were well known by selective breeders to be strictly limited.
This is because the changes seen in selective breeding are due to the shuffling, deletion and emphasis of genetic information already existing in the gene pool (micro-evolution). There is no viable mechanism for creating new, beneficial, genetic information required to create entirely new body parts ... anatomical structures, biological systems, organs etc. (macro-evolution).
Darwin rashly ignored the limits which were well known to breeders (even though he selectively bred pigeons himself, and should have known better). He simply extrapolated the strictly limited, minor changes observed in selective breeding to major, unlimited, progressive changes able to create new structures, organs etc. through natural selection, over an alleged multi-million year timescale.
Of course, the length of time involved made no difference, the existing, genetic information could not increase of its own accord, no matter how long the timescale. Natural selection can only select from what is available, i.e. what is already in the gene pool.
That was a gigantic flaw in Darwinism, and opponents of Darwin's ideas tried to argue that changes were limited, as selective breeding had demonstrated.
But because Darwinism had acquired a status more akin to an ideology than purely, objective science, belief in the Darwinian idea outweighed the verdict of observational and experimental science, and classical Darwinism became firmly established as scientific orthodoxy for nearly a century.
Opponents continued to argue all this time, that Darwinism was unscientific nonsense, but they were ostracised and dismissed as cranks, weirdoes or religious fanatics.
Finally however, it was discovered that the opponents of Darwin were perfectly correct - and that constructive, genetic changes (progressive, macro-evolution) require new, additional, genetic information.
This looked like the ignominious end of Darwinism, as there was no credible, natural mechanism able to create new, constructive, genetic information. And Darwinism should have been heading for the dustbin of history.
Darwin's idea that a single, celled microbe could transform itself into a human and every other living thing, through natural selection over millions of years, had always been totally bonkers. That it is, or ever could have been, regarded as a great 'scientific' theory, beggars belief.
However, rather than ditch the whole idea, the vested interests in Darwinism had become so great, with numerous, lifelong careers and an ideological agenda which had become dependant on the Darwinian belief system, a desperate attempt was made to rescue it from its justified demise.
A mechanism had to be invented to explain the origin of new, constructive information.
That invented mechanism was 'mutations'. Mutations are ... literally, genetic, copying MISTAKES.
The general public had already been convinced that classical Darwinism was a scientific fact, and that anyone who questioned it was a crank, so all that had to be done, as far as the public was concerned, was to give the impression that the theory had simply been refined and updated in the light of modern science.
The fact that classical Darwinism had been wrong all along, and was fatally flawed from the outset was kept quiet. This meant that the opponents of Darwinism, who had been right all along, and were the real champions of science, continued to be vilified as cranks and scorned by the mass media and establishment. Ideology and vested interests took precedence over common sense and proper science.
The new developments were simply portrayed as the evolution and development of the theory. The impression was given that there was nothing wrong with the idea of progressive (macro) evolution, it had simply 'evolved' and 'improved' in the light of greater knowledge.
A sort of progressive evolution of the idea of evolution.
This new, 'improved' Darwinism became known as Neo-Darwinism.
So what is Neo-Darwinism? And did it really solve the fatal flaws of the Darwinian idea?
Neo Darwinism is progressive, macro evolution - as Darwin had proposed, but based on the incredible idea that random mutations (accidental, genetic, copying mistakes) selected and preserved by natural selection, can provide the constructive, genetic information capable of creating entirely new features, anatomical structures, organs, and biological systems. In other words, it is macro-evolution based on a belief in the total progression from microbes to man through billions of random, genetic, copying MISTAKES, accumulated over millions of years.
However, there is no evidence for it whatsoever, and it should be classified as unscientific nonsense which defies logic, the laws of probability, the law of cause and effect and Information Theory.
Mutations are not good, they are something to be feared, not celebrated as an agent of improvement or progression.
The vast majority of mutations are harmful, they cause illness, cancer and deformities, which is not at all surprising. It is precisely what we would expect from mistakes.
If you throw a spanner into the works of a machine, you would be daft to expect it to improve the operation of the machine. However, evolutionists ignore such common sense and propose that something (which, similarly, would be expected to cause damage) caused billions of constructive improvements in complexity, design and function, ultimately transforming microbes into men, and every other, living thing.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating ....
Ironically, evolutionists fear mutations just as much as everyone else. You can bet your bottom dollar that you won't get evolutionists volunteering to subject themselves or their families to mutagenic agents in order to 'improve' humanity. You certainly won't get evolutionists deliberately going to live near chemical or nuclear plants - in order to give their idea of progressive evolution by mutations a helping hand. No way!
Evolutionists know perfectly well that mutations are very risky and are most likely to be harmful, certainly not something anyone should desire.
Yet, perversely, they still present them as the (magical) agent responsible for creating the constructive, genetic information which, they claim, progressively transformed the first living cells into every living thing that has ever lived, including humans. They present and teach that extraordinary belief as though it is an irrefutable fact.
If we don't believe the progressive evolution fantasy, or dare to question it, we are branded as unscientific, ignorant, uneducated, backward thinking cranks or fanatics.
Incredible!
I suppose, one way to try to stifle opposition to a crazy idea, is to insult or ridicule those who oppose it. The story of the 'Emperor's New Clothes' comes to mind.
It is understandable that people are sometimes confused, because they know that 'micro'-evolution is an observable fact, which everyone accepts. Evolutionists cynically exploit that confusion by citing obvious examples of micro-evolution such as: the Peppered Moth, Darwin's finches, so-called superbugs etc., as evidence of macro-evolution.
Of course such examples are not evidence of macro-evolution at all. The public is simply being hoodwinked and lied to, and it is a disgrace to science. There are no observable examples or evidence of macro-evolution and no examples of a mutation, or a series of mutations capable of creating new, anatomical structures, organs etc. and that really is a fact.
It is no wonder that W R Thompson stated in the preface to the 1959 centenary edition of Darwin's Origin of the Species, that ... the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity.
Micro-evolution is simply the small changes which take place, through natural selection or selective breeding, but only within the strict limits of the built-in variability of the existing gene pool (existing, genetic information). Any constructive changes outside the extent of the existing gene pool requires a credible mechanism for the creation of new, beneficial, genetic information, that is essential for macro evolution.
Micro evolution does not involve or require the creation of any new, genetic information. So micro evolution and macro evolution are entirely different. There is no connection between them at all, whatever evolutionists may claim.
Once people fully understand that the differences they see in various dogs breeds, for example, are merely an example of limited micro-evolution (selection of existing genetic information) and nothing to do with progressive macro-evolution, they begin to realise that they have been fed an incredible story.
A dog will always remain a dog, it can never be selectively bred into some other creature, the extent of variation is constrained by the limitations of the existing, genetic information in the gene pool of the dog genus, and evolutionists know that.
To clarify further ...
Neo-Darwinian, macro evolution is the ludicrous idea that everything in the genome of humans and every living thing past and present (apart from the original genetic information in the very first living cell) is the result of an accumulation of billions of random, genetic copying mistakes..... mutations accruing upon previous mutations .... on and on - and on.
In other words ...
Neo-Darwinism proposes that the complete genome (every scrap of genetic information in the DNA) of every living thing, or that has ever lived, was created by an incredibly, long series of random mistakes added to previous, random mistakes.
If we look at the whole picture ...
we soon realise that what is actually being proposed by evolutionists is that, apart from the original information in the first living cell (and evolutionists have yet to explain how that original information magically arose?) - every additional scrap of genetic information for all - the biological features, anatomical structures, systems and processes that exist, or have ever existed in living things, such as:
skin, bones, bone joints, shells, flowers, leaves, wings, scales, muscles, fur, hair, teeth, claws, toe and finger nails, horns, beaks, nervous systems, blood, blood vessels, brains, lungs, hearts, digestive systems, vascular systems, liver, kidneys, pancreas, bowels, immune systems, senses, eyes, ears, complementary sex organs, sexual reproduction, sperm, eggs, pollen, the process of metamorphosis, marsupial pouches, marsupial embryo migration, mammary glands, hormone production, melanin etc. .... have been created from scratch, by an incredibly long series of small, accumulated and randomly, occurring mistakes ... i.e. a random mistake accruing upon a previous, random mistake - upon a previous, random mistake - upon a previous, random mistake - over and over again, billions of times.
This notion is so incredible, we must emphasise once again what it actually means -
It means that all the body parts, systems and biological processes of all living things are the result of literally billions of random, genetic MISTAKES, accumulated over many (alleged) millions of years. This amazing thing occurred from one, original, living cell, which, it is claimed (without any evidence), spontaneously arose, entirely of its own volition, from sterile matter, in some imagined, primordial, soup scenario (contrary to the well established and unfalsified Law of Biogenesis).
Consider this ...
If, for example, there is no genetic information (constructional instructions) for bones (or any other body part) in the alleged, original, living cell, how could copying mistakes of the limited information in such a single cell produce such entirely, new constructive information? That's right, it simply couldn't, it is sheer fantasy.
Incredibly, what we are asked to believe is that something like a vascular system, or reproductive organs, developed in small, random, incremental steps, with every step being the result of a copying mistake, and with each step being able to provide a significant survival or reproductive advantage in order to be preserved and become dominant in the gene pool. Utterly incredible!
If you believe that ... you will believe anything.
Even worse, evolutionists have yet to cite a single example of a positive, beneficial, mutation which adds constructive information to the genome of any creature. Yet they expect us to believe that we have been converted from an original, single living cell into humans by an accumulation of billions of beneficial mutations.
Conclusion:
Progressive, microbes-to-man evolution is impossible - there is no credible mechanism to produce all the new, genetic information which is essential for that to take place.
The progressive, evolution story is an obvious fairy tale presented as scientific fact.
However, nothing has changed - those who dare to question the new 'improved', neo-Darwinian version of progressive evolution are still portrayed as idiots, retards, cranks, weirdoes, anti-scientific ignoramuses or religious fanatics.
Want to join the club?
What about the fossil record?
The formation of fossils...
Books explaining how fossils are formed frequently give the impression that it takes many years of build up of layers of sediment to bury organic remains, which then become fossilised.
Therefore many people don't realise that this impression is erroneous, because it is a fact that all good, intact fossils require rapid burial in sufficient sediment to prevent decay or predatory destruction.
So, it is evident that rock containing good, undamaged fossils was laid down rapidly, sometimes in catastrophic conditions.
The very existence of intact fossils is a testament to rapid burial and sedimentation.
You don't get fossils from slow burial. Organic remains don't just sit around on the sea bed, or elsewhere, waiting for sediment to cover them a millimetre at a time, over a long period.
Unless they are buried rapidly, they would soon be damaged or destroyed by predation and/or decay.
The fact that so many sedimentary rocks contain fossils, indicates that the sediment that created them was normally laid down within a short time.
Another important factor is that many large fossils (tree trunks, large fish, dinosaurs etc.) intersect several or many strata (sometimes called layers) which clearly indicates that multiple strata were formed simultaneously in a single event by grading/segregation of sedimentary particles into distinct layers, and not stratum by stratum over long periods of time or different geological eras, which is the evolutionist's, uniformitarian interpretation of the geological column.
In view of the fact that many large fossils required a substantial amount of sediment to bury them, and the fact that they intersect multiple strata (polystrate fossils), how can any sensible person claim that strata or, for that matter, any fossil bearing rock, could have taken millions of years to form?
What do laboratory experiments and field studies of recent, sedimentation events show? sedimentology.fr/
You don't even need to be a qualified sedimentologist or geologist to come to that conclusion, it is common sense.
Rapid formation of strata - some recent, field evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/
What about the idea that radiometric dating confirms vast ages for the fossil record:
Carbon dating cannot be used for the claimed, long timescale assigned to fossils by evolutionists as the maximum age it can be used for is less than 50.000 years. Sedimentary rocks also cannot be dated radiometrically. Evolutionists have to rely on the odd occasion where there is an igneous rock intrusion into a sedimentary deposit to which they apply radiometric dating. However, the dates obtained this way are not reliable, for the reason outlined below:
"As regards radiometric dating, I refer to Prof. Aubouin, who says in his Précis de Géologie: "Each radioactive element disintegrates in a characteristic and constant manner, which depends neither on the physical state (no variation with pressure or temperature or any other external constraint) nor on the chemical state (identical for an oxide or a phosphate)."
Rocks form when magma crystallizes. Crystallisation depends on pressure and temperature, from which radioactivity is independent. So, there is no relationship between radioactivity and crystallisation.
Consequently, radioactivity doesn't date the formation of rocks. Moreover, daughter elements contained in rocks result mainly from radioactivity in magma where gravity separates the heavier parent element, from the lighter daughter element. Thus radiometric dating has no chronological signification." Dr. Guy Berthault www.sciencevsevolution.org/Berthault.htm
All creatures and plants alive today, which are found as fossils, are the same in their fossil form as the living examples, in spite of the fact that the fossils are claimed to be millions of years old. So all living things today could be called 'living fossils' inasmuch as there is no evidence of any evolutionary changes in the alleged multi-million year timescale. The fossil record shows either extinct species or unchanged species, that is all.
When no evidence is cited as evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/15157133658
The Cambrian Explosion.
Trilobites and other many creatures appeared suddenly in some of the earliest rocks of the fossil record, with no intermediate ancestors. This sudden appearance of a great variety of advanced, fully developed creatures is called the Cambrian Explosion. Trilobites are especially interesting because they have complex eyes, which would need a lot of progressive evolution to develop such advanced features However, there is no evidence of any evolution leading up to the Cambrian Explosion, and that is a serious dilemma for evolutionists.
Trilobites are now thought to be extinct, although it is possible that similar creatures could still exist in unexplored parts of deep oceans.
See fossil of a crab unchanged after many millions of years:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/12702046604/in/set-72...
Fossil museum: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/
What about all the claimed scientific evidence that evolutionists have found for evolution?
The evolutionist 'scientific' method has resulted in a serious decline in scientific integrity, and has given us such scientific abominations as:
Piltdown Man (a fake),
Nebraska Man (a pig),
South West Colorado Man (a horse),
Orce man (a donkey),
Embryonic Recapitulation (a fraud),
Archaeoraptor (a fake),
Java Man (a giant gibbon),
Peking Man (a monkey),
Montana Man (an extinct dog-like creature)
Nutcracker Man (an extinct type of ape - Australopithecus)
The Horse Series (unrelated species cobbled together),
Peppered Moth (faked photographs)
The Orgueil meteorite (faked evidence)
Ida - the newly discovered (2009), hominid, 'missing link' (an extinct lemur),
Etc. etc.
Anyone can call anything 'science' ... it doesn't make it so.
All these examples were trumpeted by evolutionists as scientific evidence for evolution.
Do we want to trust evolutionists claims about scientific evidence, when they have such an appalling record?
Just how good are peer reviews of scientific papers?
www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full
Want to publish a science paper?
www.nature.com/nature/journal/v434/n7036/full/nature03653...
www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gib...
Piltdown Man was even used in the famous, Scopes Trial as positive evidence for evolution.
Piltdown Man reigned for over 40 years, as a supreme example of evidence of human evolution, before it was exposed as a crudely, fashioned fake.
Is that 'science'?
The ludicrous Hopeful Monster Theory and so-called Punctuated Equilibrium (evolution in big jumps followed by long periods of stasis) were invented by evolutionists as a desperate attempt to explain away the lack of fossil evidence for evolution. They are proposed methods of evolution which, it is claimed, need no fossil evidence. They are actually an admission that the required fossil evidence does not exist.
The Piltdown Man fake... it survived as alleged proof of evolution for over 40 years in evolution textbooks and was taught in schools and universities, it survived peer reviews etc. and was claimed as irrefutable, scientific evidence for evolution at the famous Scopes Trial..
A pig, a horse and a donkey saga...
The pig ...
Nebraska Man, this was a single tooth of a peccary (a type of pig). It was trumpeted as scientific evidence for the evolution of humans, and highly imaginative, artist's impressions of an complete, ape-like man appeared in newspapers magazines etc. All based on a single tooth. Such 'scientific' evidence is enough to make any genuine, scientist weep.
The horse ....
South West Colorado Man, was based on another single tooth ... of a horse this time! ... also proclaimed as 'scientific' evidence for human evolution.
The donkey ...
The Orce Man saga - a tiny fragment of skullcap was presented to the media as a human ancestor, accompanied by the familiar hype and hullaballoo. Embarrassingly, a symposium planned to discuss this supposed, ape-man had to be cancelled at short notice when it was 'discovered' that it was most likely from a donkey!
But, even if it was human, such a tiny fragment of skull is certainly not any evidence of human evolution, as had been claimed.
Embryonic Recapitulation - The 19th century, evolutionist zealot Ernst Haeckel (who inspired Hitler's, Darwinian, master race policies) published fraudulent drawings of embryos, and his theory was enthusiastically accepted by evolutionists as proof of progressive evolution. Even after he was exposed as a fraudster, evolutionists still continued to use his fraudulent evidence in books and publications on evolution, including school textbooks, until very recently.
Archaeoraptor - A so-called, feathered dinosaur from the Chinese, fossil faking industry. It managed to fool credulous evolutionists, because it was exactly what they were looking for. The evidence fitted the wishful thinking.
Java Man - Dubois, the man who discovered Java Man and declared it a human ancestor ..... eventually admitted that it was actually a giant gibbon. However, that spoilt the evolution story which had been built up around it. So, evolutionists were reluctant to get rid of it and still maintained it was a human ancestor. It later turned out that Dubois had also 'forgotten' to mention he had found the bones of modern humans at the same site.
Peking Man, made up from monkey skulls which were found in an ancient, limestone burning, industrial site, where there were crushed monkey skulls and modern human bones. Drawings were made of Peking Man, but the original skull conveniently disappeared. So, that allowed evolutionists to continue to use it as evidence without fear of it ever being debunked.
The Horse Series - fossils of unrelated species cobbled together, They were from different continents and were in no way a proper series of intermediates, They had different numbers of ribs etc. and the very first in the line, is similar to a creature alive today - the Hyrax.
Peppered Moth - moths were glued to trees in order to fake photographs for the peppered moth evidence. They don't normally rest on trees in daytime. In any case, the selection of a trait which is part of the variability of the existing, gene pool, is NOT progressive evolution. It is just an example of normal, natural selection within limits, which no-one disputes.
The Orgueil meteorite, organic material, and even plant seeds, were embedded and glued into the Orgueil meteorite and disguised with coal dust to make them look like part of the original meteorite, in a fraudulent attempt to fool the world into believing in the discredited idea of spontaneous generation of life (abiogenesis), which is essential for progressive evolution to get started. The reasoning being that, if it could be shown that there was life in space, spontaneous generation must have happened there. And hence, abiogenesis could be declared by evolutionists as a scientific fact.
'Missing link' Ida - Hyped up by evolutionists (including the renowned, wildlife documentary, presenter Sir David Attenborough) in 2009 as a newly discovered, “missing link” of human evolution. This allegedly, 47-million-year-old fossil was discovered in Germany. However, it is now obvious that Ida is not evidence of primate (or human) evolution at all, it is simply an extinct type of lemur.
Is macro evolution even science? The honest answer to that question has to be an emphatic - NO!
The accepted definition of science is: that which can be demonstrated and observed and repeated. Progressive evolution cannot be proved, or tested; it is claimed to have happened in the past, and, as such, it is not subject to the scientific method. It is merely a belief, based primarily on preconceptions.
Of course, there is nothing wrong with having beliefs, especially if there is a wealth of evidence to support them, but they should not be presented as scientific fact. As we have shown, in the case of progressive evolution, there is a wealth of evidence against it. Nevertheless, we are told by evolutionist zealots that microbes-to-man evolution is a fact and likewise the spontaneous generation of life from sterile matter (so-called abiogenesis). They are deliberately misleading the public on both counts. Progressive evolution is not only not a fact, it is not even proper science.
You don't need a degree in rocket science to understand that Darwinism has damaged and undermined science.
However, what does the world's, most famous, rocket scientist (the father of modern rocket science) have to say?
Wernher von Braun (1912 – 1977) PhD Aerospace Engineering
"In recent years, there has been a disturbing trend toward scientific dogmatism in some areas of science. Pronouncements by notable scientists and scientific organizations about "only one scientifically acceptable explanation" for events which are clearly outside the domain of science -- like all origins are -- can only destroy the curiosity of those who must carry on the future work of science. Humility, a seemingly natural product of studying nature, appears to have largely disappeared -- at least its visibility is clouded from the public's viewpoint.
Extrapolation backward in time until there are no physical artifacts of certainty that can be examined, requires sophisticated guessing which scientists prefer to refer to as "inference." Since hypotheses, a product of scientific inference, are virtually the stuff that comprises the cutting edge of scientific progress, inference must constantly be nurtured. However, the enthusiasm that encourages inference must be matched in degree with caution that clearly differentiates inference from what the public so readily accepts as "scientific fact." Failure to keep these two factors in balance can lead either to a sterile or a seduced science. 'Science but not Scientists' (2006) p.xi"
And the eminent scientist, William Robin Thompson (1887 - 1972) Entomologist and Director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada, who was asked to write the introduction of the centenary edition of Darwin's 'Origin', wrote:
"The concept of organic Evolution is very highly prized by biologists, for many of whom it is an object of genuinely religious devotion, because they regard it as a supreme integrative principle. This is probably the reason why the severe methodological criticism employed in other departments of biology has not yet been brought to bear against evolutionary speculation." 'Science and Common Sense' (1937) p.229
“As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists … because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution. But some recent remarks of evolutionists show that they think this unreasonable ......
This situation, where scientific men rally to the defence of a doctrine they are unable to define scientifically, much less demonstrate with scientific rigor, attempting to maintain its credit with the public by the suppression of criticism and the elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and unwise in science.”
Prof. W. R. Thompson, F.R.S., introduction to the 1956 edition of Darwin's 'Origin of the Species'
"When I was asked to write an introduction replacing the one prepared a quarter of a century ago by the distinguished Darwinian, Sir Anthony Keith [one of the "discoverers" of Piltdown Man], I felt extremely hesitant to accept the invitation . . I am not satisfied that Darwin proved his point or that his influence in scientific and public thinking has been beneficial. If arguments fail to resist analysis, consent should be withheld and a wholesale conversion due to unsound argument must be regarded as deplorable. He fell back on speculative arguments."
"He merely showed, on the basis of certain facts and assumptions, how this might have happened, and as he had convinced himself he was able to convince others."
"But the facts and interpretations on which Darwin relied have now ceased to convince."
"This general tendency to eliminate, by means of unverifiable speculations, the limits of the categories Nature presents to us is the inheritance of biology from The Origin of Species. To establish the continuity required by the theory, historical arguments are invoked, even though historical evidence is lacking. Thus are engendered those fragile towers of hypothesis based on hypothesis, where fact and fiction intermingle in an inextricable confusion."—*W.R. Thompson, "Introduction," to Everyman’s Library issue of Charles Darwin, Origin of Species (1958 edition).
"The evolution theory can by no means be regarded as an innocuous natural philosophy, but rather is a serious obstruction to biological research. It obstructs—as has been repeatedly shown—the attainment of consistent results, even from uniform experimental material. For everything must ultimately be forced to fit this theory. An exact biology cannot, therefore, be built up."—*H. Neilsson, Synthetische Artbildng, 1954, p. 11
Berkeley University law professor, Philip Johnson, makes the following points: “(1) Evolution is grounded not on scientific fact, but on a philosophical belief called naturalism; (2) the belief that a large body of empirical evidence supports evolution is an illusion; (3) evolution is itself a religion; and, (4) if evolution were a scientific hypothesis based on rigorous study of the evidence, it would have been abandoned long ago.”
DNA.
The discovery of DNA should have been the death knell for evolution. It is only because evolutionists tend to manipulate and interpret evidence to suit their own preconceptions that makes them believe DNA is evidence FOR evolution.
It is clear that there is no natural mechanism which can produce constructional, biological information, such as that encoded in DNA.
Information Theory (and common sense) tells us that the unguided interaction of matter and energy cannot produce constructive information.
Do evolutionists even know where the very first, genetic information in the alleged Primordial Soup came from?
Of course they don't, but with the usual bravado, they bluff it out, and regardless, they rashly present the spontaneous generation of life as a scientific fact.
However, a fact, it certainly isn't .... and good science it certainly isn't.
Even though evolutionists have no idea whatsoever about how the first, genetic information originated, they still claim that the spontaneous generation of life (abiogenesis) is an established scientific fact, but this is completely disingenuous. Apart from the fact that abiogenesis violates the Law of Biogenesis, the Law of Cause and Effect and the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it also violates Information Theory.
Evolutionists have an enormous problem with explaining how the DNA code itself originated. However that is not even the major problem. The impression is given to the public by evolutionists that they only have to find an explanation for the origin of DNA by natural processes - and the problem of the origin of genetic information will have been solved.
That is a confusion in the minds of many people that evolutionists cynically exploit,
Explaining how DNA was formed by chemical processes, explains only how the information storage medium was formed, it tells us nothing about the origin of the information it carries.
To clarify this it helps to compare DNA to other information, storage mediums.
For example, if we compare DNA to the written word, we understand that the alphabet is a tangible medium for storing, recording and expressing information, it is not information in itself. The information is recorded in the sequence of letters, forming meaningful words.
You could say that the alphabet is the 'hardware' created from paper and ink, and the sequential arrangement of the letters is the software. The software is a mental construct, not a physical one.
The same applies to DNA. DNA is not information of itself, just like the alphabet it is the medium for storing and expressing information. It is an amazingly efficient storage medium. However, it is the sequence or arrangement of the amino acids which is the actual information, not the DNA code.
So, if evolutionists are ever able to explain how DNA was formed by chemical processes, it would explain only how the information storage medium was formed. It will tell us nothing about the origin of the information it carries.
Thus, when atheists and evolutionists tell us it is only a matter of time before 'science' will be able to fill the 'gaps' in our knowledge and explain the origin of genetic information, they are not being honest. Explaining the origin of the 'hardware' by natural processes is an entirely different matter to explaining the origin of the software.
Next time you hear evolutionists skating over the problem of the origin of genetic information with their usual bluff and bluster, and parroting their usual nonsense about science being able to fill such gaps in knowledge in the future, don't be fooled. They cannot explain the origin of genetic information, and never will be able to. The software cannot be created by chemical processes or the interaction of energy and matter, it is not possible. If you don't believe that. then by all means put it to the test, by challenging any evolutionist to explain how genetic information (not DNA) can originate by natural means? I can guarantee they won't be able to do so.
It is true to say - the evolution cupboard is bare when it come to real, tangible evidence.
For example:
1. The origin of life is still a mystery, evolutionists have failed to demonstrate that the Law of Biogenesis (which rules out the spontaneous generation of life), and has never been falsified, is not universally valid.
2. They have no explanation of where the first, genetic information came from. Information Theory rules out an orign of such, constructive information by natural processes.
3. They assume (without any evidence) that matter is somehow intrinsically predisposed to produce life whenever the environmental conditions for life permit.
4. They deny that there is any purpose in the universe, yet completely contradict that premise by assuming the above intrinsic predisposition of matter to produce life, as though matter is somehow endowed with a 'blueprint' for the creation of life.
5. They have no credible mechanism for the increase of genetic information required for progressive evolution and increasing complexity.
6. They have failed to produce any credible, intermediate, fossil examples, in spite of searching for over 150 years. There should be millions of examples, yet there is not a single one which is a watertight example.
7. They regularly publish so-called evidence which, when properly examined, is discovered to be nothing of the sort: Example ... Orce Man (the skullcap of a donkey!).
8. They use dubious dating techniques, such as circular reasoning in the dating of fossils and rocks.
9. They discard any evidence - radiocarbon dating, sedimentation experiments, fossils etc. that doesn't fit the preconceptions.
10. They frequently make the claim that there has to be life on other planets, simply on the assumption (without evidence) that life spontaneously generated and evolved on Earth which they take it for granted is a proven fact.
11. They cannot produce a single, credible example of a genuinely, beneficial mutation, yet billions would be required for microbes to human evolution.
There is much more, but that should suffice to debunk the incessant hype and propaganda that microbes-to-human evolution is an established, irrefutable fact.
It should be enough to put an end to the greatest fraud that has been foisted on the public in scientific history.
Evolutionism is not science.
Science is the method through which theories are tested and re-tested. However, today evolution is guarded against such scrutiny and taught uncritically in our public schools. This pervasive defense of naturalism has led students to view Darwinism as the only accepted explanation for the diversity of life on Earth. This presentation will encourage critical thinking of scientific interpretations, and examine the bedrock evidence for the theory of evolution. www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZE6hm2kpYiY&list=TLGGI4E1iBi7...
We are constantly told by evolutionists that the majority of scientists accept progressive evolution (as though that gives it credence) ... but most scientists, don't actually study evolution in any depth, because it is outside their field of expertise. They simply trust what they are taught in school, and mistakenly trust the integrity of evolutionists to present evidence objectively.
That is another great MISTAKE!
Evolutionism: The Religion That Offers Nothing.
The North Coast Hiawatha was operated by Amtrak until 1979, replicating the route of the former Northern Pacific North Coast Limited (the Hiawatha name being used because the Amtrak service operated on the old Milwaukee Road route between Chicago and St. Paul). I took this on June 17, 1973 during a train ride to Livingston, Montana with my mom and step-dad for a vacation in the Montana Rockies.
Rimrock views such as this were commonplace as the train's route followed the Yellowstone River for 240 miles in southern Montana from Glendive near the North Dakota border to Livingston, the northern gateway to Yellowstone National Park.
View my collections on flickr here: Collections
Press L for a larger image on black.
Location: Belair Monte, Fanling, Hong Kong
Leica M6 TTL
Leica M Apo-Summicron 90mm ASPH
Rollei Retro 80s as ISO 50
Kodak HC-110 (E)
5 min at 20ºC
The Lebanon Cedar, Cedrus libani, boasts out of only three species of cedars in the world as a historical and majestic native conifer and the national emblem of the modern post-colonial Lebanese polity. Unlike the British government consultant Simon Anholt’s idea of ‘nation branding’ to manage a country’s image and reputation (mainly through trade, culture, and tourism), one can noticeably observe that the Lebanon Cedar has been overexploited in government and private sector marketing and brand management, a practice evident in the many cedars in logos, signs, and icons.
Until recently, the latest of these brand management projects was what the United States administration coined as the ‘Cedar Revolution’, although this socio-political movement is commonly known as ‘March 14’ or ‘Intifadat al-Istiqlal’ at the local scale and has no indication of a cedar in its logo. Nevertheless, a new ‘cedar-branded project’ -this time by the private sector- seems to dominate the scene and overwhelm all previous cedar brands, and maybe cedars themselves.
The enterprise behind the Cedar Island project is just another smart business entrepreneurship that is playing by the rules of the Lebanese free market economy and probably sectarian politics of ‘piece of the pie’. Despite the many objections to it, one can see that such a project may appeal big-time for many of the well-off Lebanese Diaspora and locals to own a piece of the Lebanon Cedar in actual physical property and in the Mediterranean Sea. In this case, the cedar-brand of the project may overshadow questioning the need or impact of such types of development. (daily star)
>>> My opinion about this project, is that it is really a very uncreative move for an idea that has been exausted in the Arabian Gulf region. The irony of this lame project, is that it is creating a replication of old Lebanese cities, such as Byblos, Tyre, Sidon, which found to be only few miles away from the site itself. It is a ridicules idea to replicate the heritage that its already there, which is unfortunately kept in deteriorating conditions... just don't know what else to say... it is really too lame to be true!
This was a view which replicated all over Birmingham during the Inner Ring clearance in the 1960's. A street of condemned houses and shops, empty, with corrugated iron roughly nailed in place and somewhere in the mayhem one business clinging to the wreckage.
In this case it was Mr C F. Mason, Hairdresser of 113 Heath Street, a street which connects Dudley Road and Cranford Street. Mr Mason had been there since 1935, his shop front had received a makeover in the 1950s with new signage and the (then) trendy wood fascia, he had an electric barbers pole* which rotated and was also illuminated. His business catered for ladies permanent waves, colouring and bleaching as well as gents haircut's, generally a short back 'n' sides in the 1950's. The shop next door was C.A. Charleton, Electrical engineer at 115 and Chatwin's, boot repairers at 117.
Heath Street is still there today but a glance at Google Earth shows that poor Mr Mason eventually gave up, nothing recognisable now remains of the street he once knew.
*The traditional barbers pole with the red spiral on white represents a stylised slashed neck, dating from the "cut throat" razor era, charming!
Peter Shoesmith Circa 1963.
Copyright Geoff Dowling & John Whitehouse: All rights reserved
At Biggin Hill Memorial Museum with a replicate of Spitfire QJ-K, the machine flown by Geoffrey Wellum in The Battle of Britain.
Geoffrey Wellum was born on 4th August 1921 and joined the RAF on a short service commission in August 1939. When his training was completed in May 1940 he was posted to No 92 (East India) Squadron, where his age and youthful looks earned him the nickname ‘Boy’.
During the Battle of Britain Geoffrey was officially credited with three enemy aircraft destroyed, four probably destroyed and several damaged.
He was awarded the DFC in July 1941 and in August was posted to 52 OTU, Aston Down, as an instructor. In March 1942 he became a Flight Commander with 65 Squadron at Debden and flew numerous fighter sweeps over enemy territory.
He was posted to Malta in August 1942, leading eight Spitfires off HMS Furious to Luqa. After arriving in Malta he suffered severe combat fatigue resulting in emotional and physical breakdown. He was still only 21 years old.
After returning to the UK and recovering, he became a test pilot at Gloster Aircraft, testing Hawker Typhoons, and later became a gunnery instructor until the end of the war. He retired from the RAF in 1961, as a Squadron Leader, to take up a position with a firm of commodity brokers in the City of London, until his retirement to Cornwall where he lived until his death, 18th July 2018.
Reflecting in those puddle after the rain we should examined in the light of the Ageless Wisdom teachings, we are reminded of the great occult maxim "As Above So Below" The mural shows the right eye, the left eye and the middle eye. This tower is the symbol for not only all three schools, but also the meaning and purpose of life itself. Vertical rods/constructs are considered archetypal symbols of the phallus. As the dual serpents address the concept of gender, the staff serves as an emissary of transference between body and mind, physically and spiritually. The rod could also be viewed as a conduit between the mundane and ethereal.. The puddle is male, the tower is female and the horizontal line is the child, the source of both the other building, for we all begin life as a child. The upper side, the feminine pathway, explores the human nature of emotions and feeling, both positive and negative, sexual energy and birthing, death, certain psychic energy, and everything that is not logical.As guided from within, outwards. “As above, so below” and vice versa, Solar Systems are born, die and come to birth anew in cycles of activity and rest, as does wo-man. There is a constant flaming out and dying down of activity in every department of nature, corresponding to the alternations of ebb and flow, day and night, summer and winter, life and death. In the beginning of a Day of Manifestation it is taught that a certain Great Being (designated in the Western World by the name of God, but by other names in other parts of the earth) limits Himself to a certain portion of space, in which He elects to create a Solar System for the evolution of added self-consciousness. He includes in His own Being hosts of glorious Hierarchies of, to us, immeasurable spiritual power and splendor. They are the fruitage of past manifestations of this same Being and also other Intelligences, in descending degrees of development down to such as have not reached a stage of consciousness as high as our present humanity, and therefore these latter will not be able to finish their evolution in this System. In God — this great collective Being — there are contained lesser beings of every grade of intelligence and stage of consciousness, from omniscience to an unconsciousness deeper than that of the deepest trance condition. During the period of manifestation with which we are concerned, these various grades of beings are working to acquire more experience than they possessed at the beginning of this period of existence. Those who, in previous manifestations, have attained to the highest degree of development, work on those who have not yet evolved any consciousness. They induce in them a stage of self-consciousness from which they can take up further work themselves. Those who had started their evolution in a former Day of Manifestation, but had not progressed far at the close, now take up their task again, just as we take up our daily work in the morning where we left off the previous night. All the different Beings, however, do not take up their evolution at the early stages of a new manifestation. Some must wait until those who precede them have made the conditions which are necessary for their further development. There are no instantaneous processes in nature. All is an exceedingly slow unfolding, a development which, though so exceedingly slow, is yet absolutely certain to attain ultimate perfection. Just as there are progressive stages in the human life — childhood, youth, manhood or womanhood, and old age — so in the macrocosm there are different stages corresponding to these various periods of the microcosmic life. A child cannot take up the duties of fatherhood or motherhood. Its undeveloped mental and physical condition render it incapable of doing such work. The same is true of the less evolved beings in the beginning of manifestation. They must wait until the higher evolved have made the proper conditions for them. The lower the grade of the intelligence of the evolving being, the more it is dependent upon outside help. At the Beginning, then, the highest Beings — those who are the farthest evolved — work upon those who have the greatest degree of unconsciousness. Later, they turn them over to some of the less evolved entities, who are then able to carry the work a little further. At last self-consciousness is awakened. The evolving life has become Woman-Man. The right eye is controlled by the left brain; it’s male knowledge. Although the right eye “sees” directly to the right brain, this is not what the Egyptians were communicating. It is not the “seeing” but rather the interrupting of the “seeing” information that was important here. It is the left brain that makes this interruption of what is seen; it controls the right side of the body, and vice versa. In the same manner, the Left Eye of Horus, controlled by the right brain, is female knowledge.What happens on one level of reality also happens on every other level; the microcosm and macrocosm behave alike. A revolution occurred during the 20th century in our understanding of the nature of the physical universe. This change is extremely important to religion, for it eliminates a basic conflict between science and religious belief. Prior to this change, our scientific beliefs were based on an approach that was initiated in the 17th century: "We live in a mechanical universe, and we are simply complex machines." This scientific notion that man was purely a mechanical system contradicts what is probably the core of religious belief, namely the idea that mind-like or spirit-like factors can make a difference in human behavior. The religious outlook assumes that a human being, acting on basis of conscious choices, is NOT equivalent to a mechanical system, whose every action is completely determined by direct interaction between tiny neighboring bits of matter. 20th century science, however, has shown that the earlier mechanical concept of reality to be incompatible with empirical facts. To cope with this failure of earlier ideas, physicist made a breakthrough change. Physical theory was converted from a theory about the physical world itself into a theory of WHAT ONE COULD KNOW about the physical world. Human experience was introduced into the theory and made fundamental. This was to be later known as the Copenhagen interpretation. It had drawbacks.For example, while it brought human knowledge into physical theory, it also renounced the possibility of understanding the underlying physical reality. It set our limits of understanding. It was the eminent mathematician John von Neumann and Nobel laureate Eugene Wigner to reincorporate physical reality. They did this by casting the new physics into a theory of the interaction between our conscious thoughts and our physical brains. This was known as von Neumann-Wigner formation of quantum theory, and rationally incorporated conscious thoughts into the basic dynamics. Physics was not yet ready to tackle the problem of interaction between our thoughts and our brain. It was some time before this was scientifically feasible for this kind of proof. Now however, there is a huge and rapidly growing field of experimental data on this question of the connection between minds and brains.
This shift in science is important significance to religion. It removes the basic contradiction between the older scientific claim that human beings are essentially mechanical robots, while religion maintains than man is not ruled by matter alone. The new physics now dynamically entangles our conscious thoughts with the quantum representation of the physical world. There is a plethora of competing theories arising from many disciplines to account for the psychophysical expressions of consciousness in function and structure. The only comprehensive theory must be one that is based in nondualism, and accounts for such self-organizing mindbody manifestations as spontaneous healing or self-recovery, or even the placebo effect. The mind-matter connection is intimately linked to any speculations we can make about alleged mind-over-matter phenomena. In fact all psi phenomena, including such nonlocality demonstrations as the “simple connections” of telepathy, ESP, or synchronicity in general are related to this problem of an underlying or connecting field through which information exchange is instantaneous and unimpeded.The leading contender for such a field, vacuum fluctuation or quantum foam, was proposed by David Bohm. Turbulent motion in this highly excited, subquantal field leads to the emergence from virtuality into actuality of quantum entities which just as quickly dissolve back into the subquantal sea. This same ocean of virtual or metaphysical “stuff” has the property of containing, storing, and transmitting information about the nature of matter and even thought. The observables of nonlocality and psi cry out for some form of interconnection between phenomenon separated in space and/or time. The concept most generally used in physics to account for spatial and temporal interconnection is that of a field. Fields themselves cannot be observed, and so can be considered meta- or beyond physical. Yet the influences propagating through them are observable, eventually. Mind, memory, and consciousness may be such phenomena. Is there one massive holographic field that actually exists in nature in the sense of Bohm’s holomovement? And if so, how does this relate to our consciousness and our relationship to the cosmos. And what is the mechanism by which this universal force interfaces within our organism? When we recognize that we really are that, that nature lies within our deepest structure and function, we come to understand that we are not separate from the whole of creation. We recognize that “I AM THAT I AM.” Everything including ourselves, is deeply connected in one holy movement. The quantum vacuum, the energy-field that characterizes the ground state of the universe, possibly furnishes the indicated ‘fifth field,’ the hidden variables of chaotic yet deterministic micromotion that bootstraps all energy/matter into existence. This plenum could transmit as-yet-unknown effects. This quantum foam, which Wheeler called superspace, consists of a pure massless charge-flux.
We argue, along with Laszlo that, “The conclusion to be derived from the considerations presented here is that the four-demnsional manifold Einstein described as spacetime is likely to be more than a geometrical abstraction. As the energetically superdense quantum vacuum, it may be a physically real field, limiting the velocity of light and other matter-particles and transmittingg a variety of effects, including, but not limited to, gravitation and electromangetism. We may well ask, then, whether the field would also transmit the kind of effects associated with psi.”
Waves of this purely informational (scalar) force could create a potential gradient where quantal motion triggers scalar waves in the vacuum, and these propagate by alternately compressing and rarefying its virtual-particle gas. Scalars are neither ‘light’ nor ‘matter’, but longitudinally propoagating fluctuations below the energy-threshold of particle pair-creation.This produces a self-generating cosmological feedback cycle which translates into interference patterns created by the motion of charged particles modifying the local topology of the vacuum. The modified vacuum field modifies in turn the motion of the particles, (Laszlo, 1993, 1994).Fourier show that any three-dimensional pattern can be analyzed into a set of regular, periodic oscillations that differ only in frequency, amplitude, and phase. Specific waveforms can be exact representations of spatiotemporal objects--thus we have a “Holographic Universe.” Analysis shows that the signals transmitted through the vacuum field are precisely of the psi variety, because information in that field is holographic, and because the propagation of the holographic interference patterns is quasi-instantaneous. Therefore, this virttual field might provide a metaphysical foundation for a broad range of psi phenomena and psychophysical interaction, including self-organization and healing. The quantum vaccum is a highly anomlous universal energy realm of pure potential. It is both the source and destination of all matter in the universe, and thus of any form of consciousness which may emerge through its autopoeitic process. The human brain, with its pronounced and constant state of chaos, could receive and amplify such signals, expressed both consciously and unconsciously in our biophsyical self and our ephemeral thoughts and intuitions.The von-Neumann-Wigner formulation provides the basic logical principles that govern the interaction between thoughts and the brain. It provides prima facie evidence that human thoughts are linked to nature by nonlocal connections. What a person chooses to do in one region seems immediately to effect what is true elsewhere in the universe. This nonlocal aspect can be understood by conceiving the universe to be not a collection of tiny bits of matter, but rather a growing compendium of "bits of information." This profound shift about the nature of reality has not yet sunk in culturally. It will happen by the promotion of understanding of the radical shifts wrought by quantum theory. Most quantum physicists are interested more in applications of quantum theory than in its deep implications. Most now agree that a conception of physical reality is informational in character, not material. Our conscious thoughts ought eventually to be understood within science and that when properly understood, our thoughts will be seen to DO something; they will be efficacious. From what most quantum physicists now understand, certain ontological claims can now be made. 1. The "physical world," as understood in quantum theory, is a store of information, and this information is NOT imbedded in hordes of tiny particles (as they were in classical theory). The information is stored in a mathematically described structure that specifies propensities for certain events to occur. This events (paradigms) include the acquision of information by human agents.2. Conscious events should eventually be understood in science, and these events should be efficacious. They should have a real effect on our actions. The von Neumann-Wigner formulation of quantum theory achieves these ends. It has never been seriously broached in science, not because it was considered unimportant, but because it was deemed too difficult. Pertinent data seemed insufficient and restrictive. This has changed because science has changed.The six sided star in the structural support of the tower incorporates the Duality, Male and Female (Unity), the Blade (upward pointing triangle) and Chalice. The blade represents the Physical, and the Chalice represents the Spiritual realm. It is sometimes referenced as the fire and water triangle as well. Moloch, Chiun and Remphan are all names for the star god, Saturn, whose symbol is a six pointed star formed by two triangles. Saturn was the supreme god of the Chaldeans. The hexagram is referred to the talisman of Saturn. The hexagram was brought to the Jewish people by Solomon when he turned to witchcraft and idolatry after his marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter. It became known as the Seal of Solomon in Egyptian magic and witchcraft. The six pointed star was adopted as the family crest or shield by the Rothschild family during the 19th century,he helped to finance Eiffel. Heavily associated with alchemy, Leo, the Lion, the Double Lion, Routi, refers directly to the Sun as being a source of knowledge. Leo, is one of the constellations of the Zodiac. The Zodiac, is a direct reference to the Sun. The Sun’s position at midday during the time of the Egyptians coincided with the midsummer solstice. Leo was a constellation of the summer.
The theme of Illumination, Knowledge, or Secrets being kept “under the Lion’s Paw” is a recurring motif.There are lions on the first floor belly. The spiral effect the descending forces of the tower, that indicates an expansion of knowledge, and the undulating dance of cosmic forces. Such dualities include:
Asleep/Awake Illness/Health Separation/Unity Male/Female
Left/Right Binding/Loosing Wax/Wane Water/Fire Sun/Moon
Yin/Yang Light/Dark Good/Evil Upper/Lower. If you take it a step further, you notice the dual intertwined snakes form a double helix DNA strand; Serpent DNA specifically. If the serpent is a biological anthropomorphism of DNA, then we can attribute the Ouroboros to cycles of DNA change.Let us examine this slide which I feel holds many secrets. First you have the sun and moon in opposite positions which proves the world has been put on a purposeful pole shift done at the hands of man.
In the East where the sun is supposed to rise you now have the moon or crescent where there is a Brother with a sword with an eagle or falcon upon it where he is shielding his eyes from the light because it is either too bright or he cannot see because he is blinded by the darkness.
In the West where the sun is supposed to set, you now have the sun with a brother who can see clearly what is going on as he holds the staff and serpent.
In the middle is the LORD OR LORDS and KING OF KINGS who represent the union of both and has risen above the Abyss on the wings of destiny. The Phoenix or Rex Mundi who represents not only the union of East and West, but also AS ABOVE SO BELOW.
So what does it mean?
The microcosm is oneself, and the macrocosm is the universe. The macrocosm is as the microcosm, and vice versa; within each lies the other, and through understanding one you can understand the other. The primary idea behind this is that the “above” refers to what is visible in the sky. The below, refers to Earth. This creates an equality as it explains how the Earth is a microcosm of the configuration of the planets in the solar system. It draws the connection that the Earth is affected by planetary orbits. This concept also affects various levels of reality: physical, emotional, and mental What happens on any level happens on every other.
The concept has not only been a practice, but an attempt to replicate and do a better job then YHWH himself. This is why alchemy and astrology play such an important role in the Illuminati.
In Alchemy, there is a process which Mercury and Lead can supposedly turned to Gold. The Gold isn’t the main goal. It’s to understand the process of how mercury or lead changes into gold. Man wants to replicate and modify what is on the Earth into their standards.
The same goes for Astrology. The elite not only observe all of the astrological signs, but use them to construct the architecture of this tower.
There will come a time when it will have been in vain that Egyptians have honored the Godhead with heartfelt piety and service; and all our holy worship will be fruitless and ineffectual. The Elohim will return from earth to heaven; Egypt will be forsaken, and the land which was once the home of religion will be left desolate, bereft of the presence of its deities.
They will no longer love this world around us, this incomparable work of YHWH, this glorious structure which HE has built, this sum of good made up of many diverse forms, this instrument whereby the will of YHWH operates in that which he has made, ungrudgingly favoring man’s welfare.
Darkness will be preferred to light, and death will be thought more profitable than life; no one will raise his eyes to heaven; the pious will be deemed insane, the impious wise; the madman will be thought a brave man, and the wicked will be esteemed as good.
As for the soul, and the belief that it is immortal by nature, or may hope to attain to immortality, as I have taught you; all this they will mock, and even persuade themselves that it is false. No word of reverence or piety, no utterance worthy of heaven, will be heard or believed.
And so the Elohiym will depart from mankind – a grievous thing and only evil angels will remain, who will mingle with men, and drive the poor wretches into all manner of reckless crime, into wars, and robberies, and frauds, and all things hostile to the nature of the soul.
Then will the earth tremble, and the sea bear no ships; heaven will not support the stars in their orbits, all voices of the Elohiym will be forced into silence; the fruits of the Earth will rot; the soil will turn barren, and the very air will sicken with sullen stagnation; all things will be disordered and awry, all good will disappear.
But when all this has befallen, then YHWH the Creator of all things will look on that which has come to pass, and will stop the disorder by the counterforce of his will, which is the good. HE will call back to the right path those who have gone astray; he will cleanse the world of evil, washing it away with floods, burning it out with the fiercest fire, and expelling it with war and pestilence.The double tetrahedron visible in the structural's forms of the tower can be referred to as the interdimensional vehicle for travel, the Merkaba. It also incorporates the Duality, Male and Female, the Blade (upward pointing triangle) and Chalice. The blade represents the Physical, and the Chalice represents the Spiritual realm. The Star of Solomon can also represent Jerusalem.The Square and Compass is the Blade and Chalice, God and Goddess in the act of Creation, and within the Star we find the Heavenly Luminaries or the Eyes or Spirits of God (the Planets). The symbols on the star represent the astrological portion of the symbol, Jupiter, Venus, the Moon, Mercury, Mars and Saturn, with the Sun being at the center. Zoroaster’ teachings mentioned earlier in the thread as Thoth or Hermes, would be responsible for the seven petal flower depicted at the center.
I tried to replicate the colors of my Eastern Veil Nebula photo from last summer (minus the RGB stars), which is another part of the Cygnus Loop that Pickering's Triangle is in. Other than some misshapen stars I'm pretty satisfied with this image. Captured on May 30, June 1, 2, 6, 7, 12, July 11, 13, 14, 15, and 16th, 2020 from a Bortle 6 zone.
---
**[Equipment:](i.imgur.com/6T8QNsv.jpg)**
* TPO 6" F/4 Imaging Newtonian
* Orion Sirius EQ-G
* ZWO ASI1600MM-Pro
* Skywatcher Quattro Coma Corrector
* ZWO EFW 8x1.25"/31mm
* Astronomik LRGB+CLS Filters- 31mm
* Astrodon 31mm Ha 5nm, Oiii 3nm, Sii 5nm
* Agena 50mm Deluxe Straight-Through Guide Scope
* ZWO ASI-120MC for guiding
* Moonlite Autofocuser
**Acquisition:** 17 hours 40 minutes (Camera at Unity Gain, -15°C)
* Ha- 56x600"
* Oiii- 50x600"
* Darks- 30
* Flats- 30 per filter
**Capture Software:**
* Captured using [N.I.N.A.](nighttime-imaging.eu/) and PHD2 for guiding and dithering.
**PixInsight Processing:**
* BatchPreProcessing
* SubframeSelector
* StarAlignment
* [Blink](youtu.be/sJeuWZNWImE?t=40)
* ImageIntegration
* DrizzleIntegration (2x, VarK=1.5
* DynamicCrop
* AutomaticBackgroundExtraction
* Deconvolution (EZ decon star mask used with self made lum mask)
* EZ denoise
* EZ soft stretch per channel
* ChannelCombination to combine Ha and Oiii (HOO > RGB)
* AutomaticBackgroundEXtraction
* Extract L > LRGBCombination (chrominance noise reduction
* [Curves](i.imgur.com/YcKQRqM.jpg)Transformations for lightness, hue and saturation
* ACDNR
* MMT noise reductiom
* LocalHistogramEqualization
* EZ Star reduction 2x
* HDRMultiscaleTransform (masked to apply to the brightest parts of the nebula)
* More curves
* Resample to 80%
* Annotation
This photograph shows part of the lovely hotel we stayed in on Boa Vista, Cape Verde on our recent holiday.
The Dissidents
L to R
Counter, Gumball, Speedster, Sparrow, Koi
Name: Eric Catcher
Alias: Counter
Age: 17
Weapons: Shield
Backstory: Eric has always wanted to be a hero, a protector, guardian, or just plain good guy. He has never had any powers or undiscovered abilities... he’s just normal. However it doesn’t take someone with abilities to be a hero. It takes heart and bravery. Eric is a kid who doesn’t take crap from anyone, and he stands up for those who can’t. One day while doing chores, he was cleaning out his attic and was dusting off some old plates. When he picked up one of them, something different happened. It glowed yellow, then uncovered a golden design. He was amazed. He was ready to bring it down when he tripped on a box and dropped it. The impact of the plate blew the entire top floor down. He realized this was his opportunity, his opportunity to be a hero. He made a strap handle from his backpack and made the plate into a shield. Taking the name as Counter due to the amount of force that can bounce of his shield, he defended his neighbor hood from crimes. He saved lives, for people in danger, helping addicts, and anyone he could in his neighborhood. He was their watcher, protector, savior, and guardian.
Name: Hugh “Hughie” Soloman
Alias: Gumball
Age: 16
Powers: super strength, can stretch like gum, sticks to walls and ceilings, bullet proof
Backstory: After being diagnosed with a life threatening skin condition, Hugh’s mother, after being abandoned by her husband while pregnant, was left with only one option, putting her baby into cellular reconstruction surgery. A doctor chewing gum sneezed in the process of deconstructing the skin tissue sample. The lazy doctor ended up taking the gum off and replicating the contaminated tissue to mend Hugh’s skin. The tissues reactant to temperature control how stiff or soft the skin would be, since Hugh was still a baby, he needed to be in an artificial womb, which are very warm he was a gooey misshapen mess. Reborn as an elastic monster, doctors and his parents abandoned helping him leaving him to go on his own. Hugh ran away, nowhere would accept him. He left for the forest where there weren’t any people. He grew a huge attachment to nature and animals giving him a peaceful happy life, that is until he gets mad. When he gets mad he will destroy any life that isn’t precious to him.
Name: Chris Shepard
Alias: Speedster
Age: 16
Powers: super speed, run up walls, super athletic
Backstory: Raised in a neglected household, Chris set out for adventure. One day he saw something fall from the sky. He ran towards the object and to his surprise it was huge. It landed in the forest behind his house. He immediately went up close to inspect it. Foolishly, although being a curious kid, he grabbed it. His whole body began to vibrate. However, the mysterious object hadn’t only caught his attention, it seemed something was coming closer. Nervously Chris said, “Hello.” Then the thing became more visible when stepping into the light. It was a pink mud creature with sticks and plants stuck in it. Chris screamed and ran. Something was different though. When he got home, the bottoms of his shoes were melted and burnt. He looked at the clock and realized he had gotten home in a fraction of the time it took him to find the mysterious object. Playing around a bit, Chris realized he had super powers, just like his favorite superhero, Racing Line, and hearing rumors about a program called V.I.P. , he was ready to set out and fight crime.
Name: Ginny Ossling
Alias: Sparrow
Age: 16
Weapons: A.I. Bird Simulated Wings
Backstory: After her sister was shot, she was determined to become a crime fighter, much like her dad at the time. She had taken engineering classes before, but this was something new. More tragedies happened and more determined she got. Working day and night on a five cups of coffee an hour schedule, she built the wings. Many prototypes passed before the real deal was built. She studied birds and jets to get the movement and speed correct. Now after all this hard work, she will put them to good use.
Name: Kayla Snow
Alias: Koi
Age: 15
Powers: Controls water and ice
Backstory: Kayla was gifted since she was a child. She was known as the introverted weirdo and was too shy to speak. Everyone thought she was mute. She had a strange attachment to water however. She would cry on purpose to play with her tears, she would spill water to freeze it., and she would cause a lot of fear because people thought she was a witch, not gifted. She was able to scare people away when they did bad things, that’s when she became a hero.
Btw Racing line is andhe :-) s OC and the V.I.P. Is Lego Creationist s old OC group
Replicating the efforts of Stratford Depot, the GreaterAnglia 90 has been decorated with Union Flag, Silver Roof, and named 'Diamond Jubilee'.
Seen underneath the canopy at Liverpool Street, the formation will work the 12:00 to Norwich, with a Mk3b DVT on the far end.
The application of the Union Flag on the Great Eastern started with Stratford decorating two Class 47s for the Silver Jubilee (when I was only very young!!), and Anglia / CrownPoint continued the tradition with 86227 for the Golden Jubilee ( www.flickr.com/photos/steam60163/5554778131/in/set-721576... ).
Kaskelot is the flagship of the Square Sail fleet and is based out of her homeport of Charlestown, Cornwall, UK (though registered to Bristol). She is a three-masted barque and one of the largest remaining wooden ships in commission. The Kaskelot was built in 1948 by J. Ring-Andersen for the Royal Greenland Trading Company and brought supplies to remote coastal settlements in East Greenland. During the 1960s, Kaskelot worked as a support vessel for fisheries in the Faroe Islands.
Square Sail purchased her in 1981, then renovated her, redesigning and re-rigging her to replicate the Terra Nova. She has since been used in several TV series and films, and is also used for sail training programmes.
biennialfoundation.org/2016/12/biennials-four-fundamental...
Biennials: Four Fundamentals, Many Variations
By Terry Smith 07 Dec 2016
When we look back at the century plus history of recurrent survey exhibitions of contemporary art––those we call biennials, triennials, and (at Kassel, itself expanding) documentas––we can see that they slowly established a set of distinctive protocols, that were formalized during the 1980s, then rapidly replicated throughout the world, while at the same time steadily increasing in size and scope. It is also evident that, today, the distinctive characteristics of the biennial form are everywhere being exceeded, as they, like every other component of artworlds everywhere, fall subject to the current frenzy of code-switching. What were those protocols, the features that became distinctive and fundamental? I will identify four, and then note some of the ways in which they are changing.
Studies such as Charles Green and Anthony Gardner’s Biennials, Triennials, and Documentas: The Exhibitions that created Contemporary Art (2016), are giving us a nuanced understanding of the historical unfolding of the biennial form. Biennials have proliferated globally, in successive waves, according to the specific needs in different parts of the world, and to the interplay between them. The result is a dense field of mobility between artists, curators, gallerists, critics, collectors and visitors––especially on an international level––that is unprecedented in its quantity, scope, and variety. It is obvious that the biennial has become as structural to what is usually called “the artworld” in any particular place as every other element in what amounts to a visual arts exhibitionary complex. Secondly, it is precisely their core format, one that offers the reliable repetition of unpredictable difference, which secured their relevance, enabled their expansion, and may ensure their longevity. Third, biennials have become essential to contemporary art’s evidently international character, many would say its “globality,” although I will argue more specifically that they have been the primary platform of the transnational transitionality that has shifted the core locus of art making, distributing and valuing from used to be called the West, moved it South and then East, within regions of the these regions, and thus, now, everywhere. It is this in-transit energy that drives much contemporary art today, throughout the world and in most of the traditional and modern centers. Finally, biennials have also become structural to contemporary art’s very contemporaneity, reflecting its preferred forms in that they have become distributed events, in their localities and across the world. As such, they too are subject to the larger changes effecting communicative exchange everywhere, including network culture’s mediatization of the social.
1. Biennials have become structural within the contemporary visual arts exhibitionary complex
Biennials share with all exhibitionary formats the fundamental purpose of holding something out for inspection, of showing items––as the definition of the word “exhibition” (in English dictionaries, at least) tells us––publicly, for entertainment, instruction, or in a competition. Within the larger exhibitionary complex, these purposes characterize distinct kinds of displays, which are usually held in specialized venues: for example, music halls, public museums, or sporting fields. Annual artist society exhibitions, since their origins in France and England during the seventeenth century, have emphasized contestation between artists, attitudes, and genres as manifest in freshly-made works of art: competition to gain entry to the academy, competition for prizes, then competition for sales. Since Venice in 1895, and Pittsburgh’s Carnegie International from 1896, recurrent exhibitions all over the world have sought to fulfill all three purposes at once.
So, as the first fundamental but not unique characteristic of a visual arts biennial exhibition, we can establish this proposition: that it offers, in one place, a display of the contemporary art of the world in ways that are entertaining, instructive, and competitive, all at the same time. Doing all these things at once begins to distinguish them from exhibitions in art museums. Biennials are, crucially, exhibitionary events, as distinct from displays of the kind exemplified most clearly in the permanent collection rooms of a modern art museum (where continuity over time is emphasized, and change is understood as a modification or eruption within the evolutionary narrative of art’s history), and from temporary exhibitions in such museums (which usually explore in more detail and depth aspects of the history of art that are exemplified in a more general way in the collection display rooms––including the rooms that show the recent past as an opening towards an unspecified present). Being events, rather than primarily an assembly of art objects on display, is what makes biennials contemporary.
The logic and dynamic of the biennial differs from the core logic and dynamic of the modern art museum. Such museums alternate between relatively static displays of their permanent collections and a program of temporary exhibitions of artworks that usually, yet not always nor entirely, come from somewhere else, often from another museum or a private collection. Within this framework, the biennial occurs as an alternative to both the collection and the temporary exhibition, while at the same time having some features of both. (Some museums––notably the Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh, host to the Carnegie International, and the Queensland Gallery of Modern Art, host to the Asia Pacific Triennial––acquire works from biennials, often the prize-winning works, thus continually reshaping their collections.) During the boom years of the 1990s and 2000s, the controlled dynamic between collection and temporary exhibitions that previously prevailed at the modern museum was disrupted by the biennial, which regularly offered different models of what both the collection rooms and temporary exhibitions program might become. This is still an important effect of biennials in most cities in most parts of the world, and effect that is still unfolding. In contrast, in some cities, such as Sydney, that has mounted a Biennale since 1973, the local museums that regularly host biennials (the Art Gallery of New South Wales, and the Museum of Contemporary Art) have worked hard to absorb them into their programming, framing them as if they were temporary exhibitions that happen to be recurrent. My instinct is that, in such cases, we are seeing the modern museum working with, but also struggling against, the artworld expectation that today all art should be open to being experienced as contemporary. More broadly, museums and galleries of all kinds are widely expected to be spaces in which art can be experienced in ways continuous with the socially mediated prosumption of images that today is spreading across all exhibitionary platforms, actual and virtual.
2. Condensed contemporaneity, every two years
The simple fact of it occurring every two years has become the most widely adopted characteristic of a biennial. It is often forgotten that the Venice International Exhibition only became a biennial some years after 1895 (indeed, its organization was made systematic during the 1920s and 1930, the fascist years in Italy). Why has this rather mechanical, pragmatic aspect of staging big-scale exhibitions become so definitive? I suggest that it is because, while they occur every two years, and are in that sense repetitions, biennials offer difference each time. They must do this, because they are, usually, committed to showing contemporary art, or recent and past art in so far as it is relevant to contemporary circumstances. Contemporary art, by its own constant redefinition, is an art of becoming, of happenings, occurrences, and occasions. While its content may include material from any time, it is precisely because it typically engages with more than a single temporality at the same time that contemporary art requires the event as its form of appearance. When contemporary art is slowed down––for example, as part of a chronological history of art display in a museum, it ceases to be contemporary, although it maintains the distinctive character of having been contemporary within the contemporaneity that we still share with it. Artworks shown in biennials may be subsequently shown at art fairs, and may be acquired by museums, but, unlike most other exhibitionary venues, neither commerce nor historical valiance is their primary purpose or source of value. Rather, it is to show a purposeful selection from, or as wide a range as possible of, the art being made in the world right now. This is why biennials have––overwhelmingly, and, until recently, almost entirely––shown new, or at least recent work, and have favored work made for the occasion, and specifically for the site. It is this impulse that underlies the preponderance of new media, videos, and installations of various kinds, as well as their openness to research-based, archival, and “social practice” work that is less readily shown in museums and commercial galleries. Biennials share these preferences with not-for-profit, alternative art spaces.
In these ways, biennials typically concentrate contemporary energy in one place, or a related set of places, for a specified time. They are a double-sided form: reliable in their recurrence, but open-ended in their actualization. We do not know what art will be like two years from now, but we can expect that it will be different. Therefore, biennials can be counted on to build anticipation beforehand, and to surprise us when they happen. A regularly timetabled openness to contemporaneity––to art to come, whatever it may be––is the second most distinctive feature of biennials.
Highsmith, Carol M.,, 1946-, photographer.
American photographer Carol M. Highsmith, replicating, as well as possible, a pose at Yellowstone National Park in northwestern Wyoming by pioneer photographer Frances Benjamin Johnston, who inspired Highsmith's career
2015-09-14.
1 photograph : digital, tiff file, color.
Notes:
Title, date and keywords based on information provided by the photographer.
Though best known for her images of antebellum mansions and other scenes of the American South, Johnston had visited Yellowstone Park, where where posed below a rock outcropping for a photo (see LC-USZ62-120449), likely taken by her chauffeur; Johnston never learned to drive. With the help of National Park Service rangers on her own photo expedition to the park in 2015, Highsmith found the exact spot of the Johnston portrait and, in tribute, stopped to replicate the photo beneath the same outcropping. The ledge on which Johnston had posed had long ago been removed to make room for the steep wooden staircase down to the Lower Falls of the Yellowstone River.
Credit line: Gates Frontiers Fund Wyoming Collection within the Carol M. Highsmith Archive, Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division.
Gift; Gates Frontiers Fund; 2015; (DLC/PP-2015:069).
Forms part of: Gates Frontiers Fund Wyoming Collection within the Carol M. Highsmith Archive.
Subjects:
America--Frances Benjamin Johnston
United States--Wyoming--Yellowstone National Park.
Format: Digital photographs--Color--2010-2020.
Rights Info: No known restrictions on publication.
Repository: Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division, Washington, D.C. 20540 USA, hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/pp.print
Part Of: Highsmith, Carol M., 1946- Carol M. Highsmith Archive. (DLC) 00650024
Higher resolution image is available (Persistent URL): hdl.loc.gov/loc.pnp/highsm.35394
Call Number: LC-DIG-highsm- 35394
I wanted to replicate what one of my photos might have been like when I played with darkroom 35 mm. processing. The Cracker Jacks container is now used to hold tea bags, the Minolta camera was my father-in-law's go-to camera during all the time that I knew him. The film was a 32 ASA black and white type we often chose to minimize the grain in the image. Today we worry about noise, then it was grain. In the film box are instructions that advise on exposure settings for the camera. They were basic and "real" photographers invested in a handheld light meter. The globe belongs to my wife and was originally a family hand-me-down. I added grain because most of the shots that I processed ended up with grain. Cameras had no meter, autofocus or flash. They were all extra things to buy. My phone camera does all of that and much more.
Trying to replicate Navia’s plastic hat in felt! I happened to have the perfect color of felt and I went ahead and used her plastic hat as a hat mold.
My version is still a little large, and I haven’t finished stiffening it yet. I can’t decide if I want to cut all the edges to match the jagged leaf style of Navia’s har, or leave it smooth and petal like. I also can’t decide if I want to try to continue the embroidery, or just skip it.
I am almost about to set this aside and start a different hat in purple. Something that more closely resembles a flapper cloche hat, and do some real embroidery and beading on it?? (I don’t think I have the right bead colors so maybe this all goes in the unfinished pile with the other projects that need pink and purple beads.)
My new landscape photography book is for sale at.....
www.flickr.com/photos/imagesofwales/6506618369/in/photost...
Join me on Facebook at.......
www.facebook.com/home.php#!/home.php?sk=group_12478289093...
© All rights reserved.
This image is copyrighted to Tim Wood; Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws. Please contact me at woodrot147@aol.com for express permission to use any of my photographs.
All of my images can be purchased......
Visit my website, coastal and countryside images at......
In replicating this fifth-gen stealth fighter, I was aiming for:
– Smooth: nearly studless in form.
– Integrated: packing in a host of features.
– Fresh: incorporating new pieces and techniques.
and of course, purist! (at least, for now; I may experiment with designing some Marine Corps liveries on waterslide decals for mere aesthetic decoration that denotes the squadron affiliation…)
The 1:40 scale replica includes:
– Opening cockpit that holds pilot, control panel, and joystick
– Hidden weapon bays in fuselage for stealth missions
– Optional exterior loadout for air-to-ground attacks
– Retracting landing gear that supports the model
– Opening flaps, rotating fan blades, and tilting vector nozzle for VTOL
– Stable Technic display stand and brick-built name plaque.
This is the first MOC I’ve finished in about five years (during which I completed my university degree, got my full-time career job, moved out, got married, and a few other things), after working on it off-and-on for at least three years. [The real-life aircraft has suffered from its own extensive delays in design / production, so I guess it could be worse where my LEGO one is concerned. XD]
A big thank-you to everyone who has inspired me along the way, including special acknowledgements to AFOL friends like the Chiles family and Eli Willsea for helping rekindle my joy in the hobby; Brickmania, for showing me a few new hinge techniques that I incorporated during these last few months of the design process; and especially my lovely wife Natalie who, bless her heart, has allowed the dining room of our tiny apartment to serve as my building studio and encouraged me to use it more often as such!
Let me know what you guys think!
Little wonders on hidden street reveal different sided of a replicate piece of design. Interesting, and yet we just cross by it every day without realizing it's true beauty.
Our land is different than yours. Your up is our right and your down is our left. Where time is told by the number of lives, not by the amount of hours in a day. Survival is only possible if you have the ability to replicate.
Through replication, you will survive.
Today had nothing about it that was right. I am not sure what happened to this photo.
But hey, it's been 7 days and I've not slipped. I guess that is an accomplishment? The two other concepts failed miserably. I looked like a Chippendale in one. Hopefully I will have a better idea for tomorrow.